曾鸣的战略与竞争讲义(免费资料).ppt

PC was not just a new technology, it coincided with a fundamtental change in firm’s strategy and organizations (SIP) Often industries move in this direction as mature, but not always. Does it work to be the only firm with a horizontal scope? IBM blew it bc they were behind and in a hurry missing the PC inflection point IBM still trying a vertical strategy w/ more success than apple… Lessons? 1. New players can emerge (intel, MS) 2. Incumbents can fall (DEC) or not (IBM) 3. Need to understand the new rules of the game (APPLE) 4. Luck and skill. MS and Intel were in the right place, but they also executed well Clear? 16 Long term vs short term Substitutability tend to be higher in the long run than in the short term Risk of defining your industry too narrowly 2 18 1 3 4 5 竞争优势 grows fundamentally out of the valuable benefits a firm is able to create for its buyers that exceed the firm’s cost of creating it. There are then two basic types of 竞争优势. With cost leadership a firm has a lower cost than competitors of producing equivalent benefits. With differentiation a firm provides unique benefits that more than offset higher costs. In reality, few firms face such stark alternatives of pursuing either cost or differentiation. Other example: McDonald, Burger King, Wendy Numerous successful companies pursue both cost leadership and differentiation (e.g. Swatch, Benetton). In many industries, market leadership is held by firm that achieves modest differentiation at an acceptable cost (GM, Toyota, Volkswagen// Hyundai, Daewoo; American Airlines). Similarly, firms that aim at differentiation cannot be oblivious of costs. Often, a differentiation advantage is important in securing the scale and learning economies necessary for cost leadership. Companies frequently get around the tradeoffs by outsourcing cost sensitive parts of their value chain or creating separate divisions (ex:Swatch; Benetton). With cost leadership a firm has a lower cost than competitors of produc